TDM/CTF/FFA a must Have!

[Je_T_aime]

TBH i´not a big fan of TDM in brink either, but from my 80 brink hours that i´ve played some maps turn into TDM anyway, so why dont give it to who wants it, and who wants to just dm can play it and doesnt ruins the fun for the rest of us,

[SphereCow]

I don’t know if this is a failure in communication on my part or you’re just not getting the question… right now, in it’s current form with all you have available, how would you NOW attract players to the game? A lot of people have left because of issues, or because they didn’t get what they thought they were getting. Just as many decided not to buy the game due to those said issues and the general consensus is not good. I’m not buying the whole “they just don’t get it” excuse that some people are using, there’s reasons for things like that happening, and mass lunacy is not it. So how do you get people to this game now?

People did not come to the game because it promised CTF, TDM, or FFA. They came to it because of what it was. I would fix the bugs and make improvements on it. You’re pressing the idea that you need to pull people from CoD, a game that’s on the opposite end of the spectrum. Like I said before, time and time again, fix bugs, release SDK, work on creating non-linearity within the campaign. If you think the entire market of PC shooter players rests in people who play CoD, then you’re becoming myopic in forgetting that so many people deride CoD, and don’t enjoy it because of the game modes’ relative mindlessness. If you brought back some of the non-linearity of W:ET and improved upon it, then advertised those features you could encourage people to play the game. It’s not even a matter of creating new maps, just a matter of cleverly editing the crap out of existing ones so they don’t become stale. That would also pave a new way and improve upon SD’s creation of campaigns and maps in future games, as well as retain a large number of people who think linear objs are boring.

There is no ‘what it was’, it was words, trailers and a perception of what was given to them. They were told it had SP, it doesn’t, it has offline with bots so that’s a lacking feature right there. I’m stuck on the idea that it’s blatantly obvious you can’t draw a crowd with a single gametype dressed up as something it’s not. Yes some players may not know what it was like, but there’s just not enough here to convince them to find out. Back then we were used to less game, modern day gamers aren’t… they want more, or something on par with current games… you don’t grab their attention by offering less… that’s just silly thinking. And yes you can like both, but unfortunately more people like one than the other, and the masses have no reason or incentive to switch to this one right now.

The objective mode isn’t really a gametype. It’s a set of gametypes related to the map that the players engage in throughout the longevity of the map. Adding “classic” gamemodes parallel to that, then developing maps for those gametypes is a waste of time. I’m not talking about maps like Frostbite or Baserace. Those are essentially CTF, but what a lot of these people seem to want are symmetrical, Q3A/TF2 style, basic CTF along with TDM. People aren’t storming the forums making dozens of threads about CTF or TDM not being in the game. They’re complaining about bugs, weapon imbalances, and horrible AI. Improve upon those things that should have been set straight to begin with, and offer more content in the way that’s always been done.

[QUOTE=DarkangelUK;317540]Kinda contradicting yourself there. You have people refusing to switch class because they beefed up their preferred one. Regardless of intentions, the common view is abilities give you an advantage, which regardless of how minute, they do. A mechanic that actively puts you off from changing class is NOT helping people understand how the game works, in fact it’s doing the opposite. That to me is straying from the fundamentals.

So that’s pub players affected therefore I view it as unwelcome. The comp crowd have their specific roles within their team setup, so class change is not a factor… but they want abilities either locked or removed, and ranks locked as well… so they don’t want it either. Hardly a fitting addition to the series now is it. Yes you can use the old excuse again “but they’re not getting it”, I say it’s the other way round.[/QUOTE]

I knew you’d point out that bold text. I was talking about the ranks, perks, and unlocks as a whole in the first sentence, and weapon unlocks in the third. Should have highlighted the last part about overall advantages, too. You gain the ability to do certain things better with the weapon buffs, but the buffs also hurt other abilities, giving you customization of your advantage, rather than advantages from complete improvements.

What? I don’t give a lick about these features? If they’re getting it or not, who gives a damn? I certainly don’t. It’s a non-issue. In ET, I still play with a guy named Vann Dyno, who only plays engineer on defense. He plants dynamite around objectives. Tonzaa The Ripper only goes covert ops, gets in disguise, and stabs people. Disitegrator only uses panzerfaust as a soldier if it’s open. Deathlike always tries to finish the objectives as fast as possible as engineer. Turner, 20 other guys, and almost all the women who play there only play medic. That’s the way it’s always been in this series. Some people stick to weapons, others stick to classes, some do only the objective classes, others like defense or offense, while some like simply, to find ways of being assholes. In this game, now you have the option of body types and weapon customization. Not a big deal at all.

Actually I had a complete rework of my binds to try and find the least cumbersome layout that didn’t get me killed having to keep eye contact on an incapped player until the hint popped up. Also did the fake grenade weaponbank so I could move more than forward and back when throwing a grenade, and also. be able to cook it and aim it while strafing and looking round.

My binds are exactly the same as both ETQW and ET, minus prone and vehicle controls.

WASD = move, ZXC = specialties F = class abilities G = grendae, 1/2 = weapons, caps/shift = jump/crouch

The idea that that’s the only reason people don’t switch classes is absurd. You’ll also find people who try to get the most out of the game by leveling up as many classes as they can. And when other players realize that they’re letting the floor get mopped with their tongues, they’ll adapt to the ever evolving metagame. Comp players’ opinions are kind of pointless on this topic. They’re always more extreme, because they’re playing competition. I’m sure comp players want to play symmetrical CTF/TDM and FFA too, right?

ET may not have been your average on-rails SP game, but it was still linear… Do A, then B, then C, but as you say below, with some teamwork and tactics you could go direct to C, or A then C etc. But sorry I’m sticking to my statement with regards to Brink, SP is simply MP with bots, the problem is they marketed the wrong portion and told everyone it was a SP game you could also play online friends, which gives the wrong impression. And with regards to maps from games etc, I believe any talented company could take any map from any game and turn it into MP, and have it play offline with bots.

ET sure was linear, save for a few maps like V2 rocket. And I’m not talking about turning it into MP, I meant turning MP maps from ET, ETQW, BRINK into SP as opposed to doing the same with Q3A, Unreal, and CoD CTF/TDM/FFA maps. SD’s games are all single player maps, playable with bots, or with humans, but almost exclusively, with humans. Yes, SD did market the wrong portion of the game, for having delivered bots so poorly, when ETQW’s bots were above average.

I’m in agreement with you here completely. As mentioned above, Brink and ETQW have set A, B, C steps to follow… so you have 16 players at A, then 16 players at B, then 16 players at C… it’s a mess… it’s so impersonal… and well… kinda shallow.

Yup. SD could improve this by having some objectives move, depending on the maps before them, and objectives completed within the game. Some walls could be constructible/destructible, and cause the story to branch a bit. with 3-4 varied endings. I’m sure the animators and level designers wouldn’t mind having something to do.

I mentioned this already… they’ve completely bloated the gameplay and lost the concept of what made RtCW and W:ET great. I don’t think anyone complained majorly about how those games played, and it certainly wasn’t a secret that how they play was considered by many as the perfect MP experience. It feels like what happened with ETQW was like “ok we know exactly what you love about ET, but we’ll change it”, it wasn’t as popular but it had its following. Then with Brink it was “We know what you loved about ET and ETQW, but we’re gonna change it more”, and well that’s just a rinse and repeat cycle there. There are some great concepts in Brink, but some not so great… and the not so great ones are affecting the feel of the play a lot more than the great ones.

I for one, like that they do not simply re-create, and improve the W:ET and RTCW. I feel like they stuck to the core elements of teamplay on objective based, progressive maps. That’s all I need. Weapons, classes, abilities, all that peripheral stuff is just fluff. Stream line a game with a good message, and make it really dynamic, and give players abilities that are social, meaning interaction with other players, and giving eachother the ability to show personality. In the end, whether or not you can wear a nice hat matters not one bit, but whether or not you can drop kick a door open for your teammates to trick plant the Fuel Dump is all that really matters.

Vehicles + Asymmetrical teams + parkour elements + player interactions + non-linear objectives/campaigns = the tops for me. Anything else is secondary.

While rejigging would be nice, I don’t see it happening… tbh I don’t see anything happening other than additional stuff being added that already conforms to the game… so new maps, weapons, abilities, clothing etc.

Yeah. We need the SDK.

If clothing, weapons, and abilities are included in this patch I’m going to become pretty irritated with SD.

[DarkangelUK]

People did not come to the game because it promised CTF, TDM, or FFA. They came to it because of what it was. I would fix the bugs and make improvements on it. You’re pressing the idea that you need to pull people from CoD, a game that’s on the opposite end of the spectrum. Like I said before, time and time again, fix bugs, release SDK, work on creating non-linearity within the campaign. If you think the entire market of PC shooter players rests in people who play CoD, then you’re becoming myopic in forgetting that so many people deride CoD, and don’t enjoy it because of the game modes’ relative mindlessness. If you brought back some of the non-linearity of W:ET and improved upon it, then advertised those features you could encourage people to play the game. It’s not even a matter of creating new maps, just a matter of cleverly editing the crap out of existing ones so they don’t become stale. That would also pave a new way and improve upon SD’s creation of campaigns and maps in future games, as well as retain a large number of people who think linear objs are boring.

I never said they did come for TDM or CTF at all, but they did come under false pretenses of playing a game that doesn’t exist except in interviews and marketing blurbs (mostly from the console side at least). I’ve pressed no such idea that they need to come from CoD, that was my example… they need to come from everywhere, and they aren’t… in fact what’s worse is that they are leaving. When a game makes a billion in revenue consecutively, and sells millions upon millions, sorry but you’re just naive if you think ‘so many people’ are against the game… because so many MORE people are not. CoD does something right, something that ETQW and Brink has failed to do, I’m not saying it’s TDM or CTF, but it’s doing something right, and I’m not accepting global brainwashing and mass hysteria.

The objective mode isn’t really a gametype. It’s a set of gametypes related to the map that the players engage in throughout the longevity of the map. Adding “classic” gamemodes parallel to that, then developing maps for those gametypes is a waste of time. I’m not talking about maps like Frostbite or Baserace. Those are essentially CTF, but what a lot of these people seem to want are symmetrical, Q3A/TF2 style, basic CTF along with TDM. People aren’t storming the forums making dozens of threads about CTF or TDM not being in the game. They’re complaining about bugs, weapon imbalances, and horrible AI. Improve upon those things that should have been set straight to begin with, and offer more content in the way that’s always been done.

SockDog already said it fine, there needs to be something there to attract players to the game in the 1st place, then graduate them towards objective gameplay… it’s blatantly obvious that the current format isn’t drawing the crowds in. At the risk of repeating myself, what’s the point in having this great gamestyle if no one ever plays it? It’s not a waste of time if you bump up your player/customer base… that’s about the most well spent time a company could ever make. You’re almost being narrow minded in thinking otherwise.

I knew you’d point out that bold text. I was talking about the ranks, perks, and unlocks as a whole in the first sentence, and weapon unlocks in the third. Should have highlighted the last part about overall advantages, too. You gain the ability to do certain things better with the weapon buffs, but the buffs also hurt other abilities, giving you customization of your advantage, rather than advantages from complete improvements.

I’ve said my part on abilities, they’re stopping people from changing class which is wrong and the most obvious thing that goes against their vision. As for weapons, I’m not really fussed either way… but it seems most people have settled on the same couple of weapons which makes the rest a bit pointless.

What? I don’t give a lick about these features? If they’re getting it or not, who gives a damn? I certainly don’t. It’s a non-issue. In ET, I still play with a guy named Vann Dyno, who only plays engineer on defense. He plants dynamite around objectives. Tonzaa The Ripper only goes covert ops, gets in disguise, and stabs people. Disitegrator only uses panzerfaust as a soldier if it’s open. Deathlike always tries to finish the objectives as fast as possible as engineer. Turner, 20 other guys, and almost all the women who play there only play medic. That’s the way it’s always been in this series. Some people stick to weapons, others stick to classes, some do only the objective classes, others like defense or offense, while some like simply, to find ways of being assholes. In this game, now you have the option of body types and weapon customization. Not a big deal at all.

Maybe you’re not paying attention to the gameplay or the boards then, it’s quite obvious that abilities are having an affect on how people play which shouldn’t be happening… again this goes against their vision of the game… hence having XP bribes to have players switch to the right class. On pubs in the early days of W:ET you could guarantee people played for the game and adjusted classes/weapons as needed… these days it’s just bitter crossfire players that refuse to move on that stalk the game.

My binds are exactly the same as both ETQW and ET, minus prone and vehicle controls.

WASD = move, ZXC = specialties F = class abilities G = grendae, 1/2 = weapons, caps/shift = jump/crouch

The idea that that’s the only reason people don’t switch classes is absurd. You’ll also find people who try to get the most out of the game by leveling up as many classes as they can. And when other players realize that they’re letting the floor get mopped with their tongues, they’ll adapt to the ever evolving metagame. Comp players’ opinions are kind of pointless on this topic. They’re always more extreme, because they’re playing competition. I’m sure comp players want to play symmetrical CTF/TDM and FFA too, right?

Please don’t do that thing where you type what you think you read, rather than what you actually read. Where did I say it was the only reason? I said it was A reason, and a reason born out of a purposely designed game mechanic, which goes against the original vision of having the player play for the game rather than for the class he prefers. You’ve got the mindless players who wouldn’t switch anyway, and now an incentive stopping those that would normally switch and causing to stay the class they prefer. Yes people level as many classes, but if they find the objective calls for the class they haven’t beefed up on their current char, then hesitation is put on their choice which shouldn’t happen. As regards to the last part about comp players… uh sure what ever, random tangent there, but when a mechanic effects pub play, and comp players don’t want it… then it’s not very well implemented.

ET sure was linear, save for a few maps like V2 rocket. And I’m not talking about turning it into MP, I meant turning MP maps from ET, ETQW, BRINK into SP as opposed to doing the same with Q3A, Unreal, and CoD CTF/TDM/FFA maps. SD’s games are all single player maps, playable with bots, or with humans, but almost exclusively, with humans. Yes, SD did market the wrong portion of the game, for having delivered bots so poorly, when ETQW’s bots were above average.

Not sure if you’ve played many SP games dude, but I can’t recall a single game that reminded me of playing any of SD’s games. My idea of SP is on-rails working your way through levels in a scripted fashion, sure you can make SP maps into MP, but that’s mostly where they come from. Q3 and Unreal are purely MP games, CoD’s MP maps were born from it’s SP portion… slices taken from parts of the SP and converted to MP. I think you’re trying to convince me that ET, ETQW’s and Brink’s maps can work perfectly well and be classed as SP style… not gonna happen, MP through and through.

Yup. SD could improve this by having some objectives move, depending on the maps before them, and objectives completed within the game. Some walls could be constructible/destructible, and cause the story to branch a bit. with 3-4 varied endings. I’m sure the animators and level designers wouldn’t mind having something to do.

I for one, like that they do not simply re-create, and improve the W:ET and RTCW. I feel like they stuck to the core elements of teamplay on objective based, progressive maps. That’s all I need. Weapons, classes, abilities, all that peripheral stuff is just fluff. Stream line a game with a good message, and make it really dynamic, and give players abilities that are social, meaning interaction with other players, and giving eachother the ability to show personality. In the end, whether or not you can wear a nice hat matters not one bit, but whether or not you can drop kick a door open for your teammates to trick plant the Fuel Dump is all that really matters.

Vehicles + Asymmetrical teams + parkour elements + player interactions + non-linear objectives/campaigns = the tops for me. Anything else is secondary.

Bloated gameplay that’s reducing the playerbase by each release, that tells you it’s going in the wrong direction, so I believe yes to do need to get back to the simpler times of RtCW and W:ET… they were popular for a reason. There’s a reason they don’t add major changes to popular sports, and haven’t done for decades… it’s what people like and what people want. Think of it as the CoD/Fifa/Madden mantra if you will, but the numbers don’t lie.

Yeah. We need the SDK.

If clothing, weapons, and abilities are included in this patch I’m going to become pretty irritated with SD.

Agree and agree

I’m gonna be honest dude, I’ve got far better things to be getting on with than typing up large posts for a frivolous debate where it seems only one of us wants this game to grow. You’re stuck in your ways for a gametype that’s heading the wrong way, and losing players by each release. You’re hard pushed to find someone that thinks Brink is better than ETQW, and harder pushed to find someone that thinks ETQW was better than W:ET… that’s a downward slope and should be a big obvious indication that something is going wrong and needs to change. I’ll leave you to it now, i’ve said my piece and can honestly say i’ve not been convinced of the contrary at all… in fact it’s probably made my belief even stronger.

[sirius89]

CTF!? HELL YES!
TDM/DM!?!?!?!!? HELL NO!

People can say what they want,CTF in Brink on GOOD maps can be a ****LOAD of fun and i think there can be much strategy when the maps give you enough options.

[SphereCow]

[QUOTE=DarkangelUK;318421]
I’m gonna be honest dude, I’ve got far better things to be getting on with than typing up large posts for a frivolous debate.[/QUOTE]

To be 100 percent honest, that’s the only thing I read in that entire post, and I really don’t care about anything else.

Very funny how that worked out, I think.

[SockDog]

So we’re agreed.

FFA/TDM/CTF/KotH/DeFrag/Freeze/JailBreak all in the next patch

:TROLLFACE:

[DarkangelUK]

Must have instagib! Didn’t ETQW have instagib with The Longest Yard map?

[SockDog]

Oh man, I forgot the [strike]mofo raging anger[/strike] fun instagib was in Q3. Bring on the rails!

[FoxiT]

This is the only thing i can answer…

[Rossko93]

Having TDM in a game that focuses heavily on teamwork will not work. Brink is all about completing objectives and helping each other. This is not Call Of Duty where you mindlessly kill each other to a certain score limit.

But I do welcome the idea of a CTF game mode since it is an objective type game mode.

[Happymonster]

ctf would be cool

atm the objective i like best is running the suitcase to the upload point
which is basically what ctf will be like except with 2 suitcases

the problem will be how to sort the spawning, for the most intense game experience i would suggest that the spawnpoints will be in the middle.
That way when u get killed in base u have another chance to intercept the carrier in the middle.
If u let the spawning take place in base it will be a much more stand off type gameplay (like in q3 vanilla or tf2 for that matter).

I dont think u can do ctf on just any map, it has to be fairly symmetrical because ctf becomes quickly unbalanced unlike other gametypes

[Brink791]

The game shouldn’t only have objective type games they should add team deathmatch called team battle, free for all type game called Battle Royal, a game type called PSR for parkour skill run ( were players are timed to do a parkour run and the one with the most style, flare and best time wins ) and even a tournament style game called Elimination. The touny would be a game with 16 people but with 1 vs. 1 match ups ( with no classes ) and the others not in that match would spectate ( a way for other players see other player’s skill in the game ) They would play on small maps ( you could make at least 5 different small maps to keep it fresh ) packed with a lot of parkour routes and extra health on players to make it interesting and show that you need skill in using the SMART system and so no one can just shoot someone and it is over with but so they have an escape route and it prolongs the match . The 2 in that same match up would play in 3 rounds and over all winner ( 2/1 ) moves on and loser is out except for in the finals where there is 5 rounds and so on it plays just like a tournament ( but losers should still be able to watch ). The champ could also be rewarded with a lot of XP and or a special unlock or just for the fun of it or the glory of winning.

[StillBatusBrad]

All things team-based = hell, yeah. The more modes and maps the better.

TDM = ****, no. K/D, melee-only-irritating ****s, 8 vs 8 self-reviving medics, glitchers, twitchers and ‘smack’ on my headphones? I’d rather chew off my own feet, frankly. The lack of TDM is why I bought Brink over anything else last month. I’m too old for that crap.